Code Revisions Committee discusses potential revisions

The Code Revisions Committee met for the first time this year Sunday to discuss potential areas for review.

Student Assembly Chief of Staff Drew Wilke ’15 said the SA election process is one area that the executive branch is looking to review. Wilke said issues arose in the 2014 spring election when students created email groups using the College of William and Mary’s directory — a move that side-stepped the ban on candidates using College listservs.

“They weren’t punished for it. … They were strongly encouraged not to do that again,” Wilke said.

Wilke also introduced a code revision that would change the date the Executive Appropriations Committee submits the budget to the SA president. Due to this year’s academic schedule, the EAC would have a shorter period of time than usual to maintain the Feb. 1 submission date. Wilke suggested moving the deadline to two weeks after the first day of spring semester classes. The committee members said they will draft a bill introducing this change to the code.

Wilke, a three-year member of the committee, emphasized the ways in which the Code Revisions Committee can make changes.

“Use this committee to reflect on the way we want our organization [to be] and how we could make this better,” Wilke said.

He also outlined the differences between functional language changes and cultural changes. He noted that functional changes to the code can lead to cultural changes, citing the condensed vice president positions in the Undergraduate Council last year.

“The culture change that was hopefully going to come out of that was to have better accountability for each class,” Wilke said.

Senate Chair Dan Ackerman ’16 said the committee should make changes in a timely manner, so that those running in next semester’s election can prepare accordingly.

“The sooner, the better — it’s not fair to make changes without any fair warning,” Ackerman said.

The committee elected Sen. Yohance Whitaker ’16 as chair and Sen. Daniel O’Dea ’18 as secretary. They then divided the code’s five parts among committee members for review before the next meeting.

“I actually do recommend that [committee members]you do read the entirety of the code,” Whitaker said.